Re: [tied] The Slavic imperfect

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miguel Carrasquer [mailto:mcv@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 1:48 AM

> As such, the hiatus breaker -j- must be old in these forms,
> otherwise we would have /e^/ not /a/ (e:je: > e^ja), and the
> forms without -j- must have lost it (e^ja, aja > e^a, aa),
> contracted forms being more recent still.

This is true if your theory about the imperfect is true (in Xaburgajev's
*-(e:)-a-x- the *-a- is original). At any rate, if *-j- is old, we still
don't have any reliable examples of a [VV]-sequence in Proto-Slavic.

Sergei